Our league reviews all trades via veto (5) - We have a player who has had a couple of trades vetoed already and now just pulled off the following trade (because it's a holiday weekend there was not enough veto's - plus he campaigns to justify his trades) - Is this fair trade?

4-6 players gives up Lynch (bye)/Fitz/Hou D for Murray (IR)/Mathews(questionable)/Pitt D (bottom half D) and Bowe (WR5) - I argued that this was an unfair trade and that there should've been at least a starting RB included that was assured of playing this weekend since Lynch was on a bye.

Is this a fair trade or not? The reason behind the trade was supposedly to give the player 4-6 a chance to win this week - Oh and the player who traded Murray also owns Jones (who starting this weekend). . .To me it STINKS of collusion. . .

Thanks Ranger - I guess my only thing is that the team giving up Lynch that needs a win this week is taking two players in return that are injured and won't be playing this week (most likely mathews is out and no doubt Murray is out) - so the trade really boils down to Houstons D/Fitz for Pitt D and Bowe - Do you think the guy is really going to win this week with Pitt D and bowe instead of his own Hou D (fitz was throw in after the thurs night game to make the trade "Work") - There are easily 10 WR on the waiver wire better than Bowe right now and no doubt Hou is better than Pitt - Murray may not be back for weeks and who knows about mathews . . .Lynch is a RB1/2 every week . . .Oh and now the same teams are trading again - The only thing this trade does is make one team stronger and one team gauranteed lose this week . . .Oh they just made another trade - I guess to make things "Right" - The team that got Lynch/Fitz/Hou D just traded Felix to the same team in return for James Stewart - An obvious "Make Up" trade as the first one was BS. . .